We were planning on re-using the REPORT method and the
DAV:repository-report in ACL protocol, but we've gotten
feedback that coupling the two protocols this tightly
is undesireable, and that the generic DAV:repository-report
is a confusing/misleading.
To address this concern, I propose that we split the
DAV:repository-report into a separate report for each
special type, i.e. DAV:workspace-location-report
and DAV:activity-location-report for versioning
and DAV:principal-location-report for ACL.
The definition of the REPORT method would then appear
in both the ACL protocol and the Versioning protocol,
thus removing any dependencies between them.
Any objections?
Cheers,
Geoff